Search Indian IP Case Law
Judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on patents, trade marks, copyright, designs and geographical indications — organised by Act and section, each with a link to the judgment on the court’s website.
34 results
Array Biopharma Inc v. Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs
A combination of distinct and independent active drugs, each with its own chemical identity and mechanism, does not fall under the Section 3(d) bar for derivatives of known substances. Using phrases such as 'for simultaneous, sepa…
Inventive StepMethod of TreatmentPharmaceutical CombinationPrior ArtPatentsBayer Corporation v. Union of India & Ors.
A compulsory licence under Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 may be granted where the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to a patented invention have not been satisfied, the invention is not available at a reason…
Compulsory LicencePublic HealthReasonably Affordable PriceSection 84PatentsBigtec Private Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
An objection that devising nucleotide probes or primers is routine experimentation lacking inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) must engage with evidence of unexpected effects placed on record; and the Section 3(c) exclusion for …
BiotechnologyInventive StepPatent ProsecutionPrior ArtPatentsBishwanath Prasad Radhey Shyam v. Hindustan Metal Industries
An improvement on a device or process already known must involve more than a routine workshop improvement; it must independently satisfy the tests of novelty and inventive step by producing a new result, a new article, or a better…
Inventive StepNoveltyObviousnessPatent RevocationPatentsBoehringer Ingelheim International GMBH v. The Controller of Patents & Anr.
A divisional application under Section 16 is maintainable only where the claims of the parent application themselves disclose a plurality of distinct inventions; disclosure of additional inventions solely in the specification, wit…
Claim ConstructionDivisional ApplicationPatent ProsecutionPlurality Of InventionsPatentsCommunication Components Antenna Inc. v. Ace Technologies Corp. & Ors.
In assessing infringement at the interim stage, patent claims are to be given a purposive construction covering the substance of the claimed technical solution, and a defendant's unexplained refusal to disclose technical data pecu…
Adverse InferenceClaim ConstructionInterim InjunctionPatent InfringementPatentsCrystal Crop Protection Limited v. Safex Chemicals India Limited & Ors.
Where a complete specification and the patentee's own conduct during prosecution treat a claimed element as necessary to achieve the invention's stated technical effect, that element cannot later be characterised as non-essential …
Claim ConstructionDoctrine Of EquivalentsInterim InjunctionPatent InfringementPatentsDeepak Nitrite Limited v. The Assistant Controller General of Patents and Designs
It is wholly impermissible for the Controller, while exercising quasi-judicial powers under Section 15, to rely upon 'common general knowledge' as a self-sufficient ground for refusing a patent application without setting out and …
Common General KnowledgeFood Grade Sodium NitriteFree-FlowingImpurity ProfilePatentsDr. Aloys Wobben & Anr. v. Yogesh Mehra & Ors.
Section 64(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 grants alternative, not cumulative, remedies for seeking revocation of a patent: a petition before the Appellate Board, or a counter-claim in an infringement suit. Once a person interested el…
Counter-claimElection of RemediesPatent LitigationPatent RevocationPatentsE.R. Squibb and Sons, LLC & Ors. v. Zydus Lifesciences Limited
In a quia timet action under Sections 48 and 108, a strong prima facie apprehension of imminent infringement, evidenced by the defendant's own regulatory and manufacturing conduct, can justify an interim injunction; and a biosimil…
BiotechnologyInterim InjunctionPatent InfringementPharmaceutical Patent